StarMade V0.19476 Transporters, Activation Gates, Optimizations and more

[Zekester81]

I saw what happened in the original Star Trek movie. You won't be seeing me build any transporters. Keep up the good work, and thank you!

 

[Lone_Puppy]

This new update is awesome!
I like the new textures, very cool!

Sorry to say, but I had a few weird issues though;

• Exiting the core into near by blocks. Found a way around this, enter build mode an aim at a near by empty space. It appears like I can aim my exit point. Is this a new feature? Cool if it is.
• While in build mode, I couldn't edit a block behind a wedge. I would end up change another block somewhere behind the one I was targeting. A bit frustrating, but I could work around it.

I had such awesome fun playing with the transporters last night. There were a few strange occurrences I had, but all in all it's awesome fun. Great work guys, you are the man!

What I mean by strange, as in;

• Tested transport from moving ship to station and got slapped against the wall. Lucky it doesn't kill him.
• Tested Station to moving ship and fell out of the ship. Appeared the alignment failed for some reason.
• When transporting from moving to stationary structure I don't appear on the destination pad, but somewhere near by. It appears the transporter rematerialization subroutine could be out of wack. This would be a great feature to add to a failing power system or damaged blocks. Maybe have the player materialize upside down or sideways. Oh and appear in an alternate universe where your first officer suddenly has a beard and the chicks wear revealing uniforms.

 

[lupoCani]

While I, as a fan of shuttles and ship-to-ship docking, remain sceptical towards these transporters, I welcome their roleplay applications. The rest sound equally interestesing, if a bit specialized.

 

[StormWing0]

The only thing about transporters that needs to change is how they bring the shields down. Say make it so they are down for a few seconds based on some before and after transport Cooldown, than shields quickly regen to where they were minus any damage done while under fire. This would help both sides of the debate a bit since on side doesn't seem to care, but the other wants instant regen to where they were or no drop at all. So I figured a middle ground would work.

 

[FatCobra]

Is anyone else having issues with docked reactors?

 

[SchnellBier]

Is anyone else having issues with docked reactors?

Tested a bit. If another entity is in front of your power supply beam it will ignore everything and hit this entity. So it maybe a turret, another docked reactor, a docked ship or a rail door in front of your power supply beam output that gets targeted. It can be that this is also the problem with docking itself. Somehow the targeting priority is messed up.

 

[FatCobra]

Tested a bit. If another entity is in front of your power supply beam it will ignore everything and hit this entity. So it maybe a turret, another docked reactor, a docked ship or a rail door in front of your power supply beam output that gets targeted. It can be that this is also the problem with docking itself. Somehow the targeting priority is messed up.

In my case the output pf the power supply was flush with the station it is docked to.

 

[SchnellBier]

In my case the output pf the power supply was flush with the station it is docked to.

It probably ignores the wall and shoots into the next entity. As you can see in the gif the beam ignores the ship and an entity i tried to dock between the ship and the reactor and goes straight to the next docked entity on the same ship.

 

[therimmer96]

It probably ignores the wall and shoots into the next entity. As you can see in the gif the beam ignores the ship and an entity i tried to dock between the ship and the reactor and goes straight to the next docked entity on the same ship.

I've noticed this with rail docking beams, noticed it pass through the rail and hit the elevator behind it.

 

[Lone_Puppy]

The only thing about transporters that needs to change is how they bring the shields down. Say make it so they are down for a few seconds based on some before and after transport Cooldown, than shields quickly regen to where they were minus any damage done while under fire. This would help both sides of the debate a bit since on side doesn't seem to care, but the other wants instant regen to where they were or no drop at all. So I figured a middle ground would work.

I would prefer a disruptive effect where the shields gradually or instantly lose a percentage of power based on how many people or objects are transported. I don't like the idea of the shields going down completely. Or did I misread that.

 

[StormWing0]

Shields wouldn't go down totally unless they got too low in the first place. XD At that point if someone beams over you're screwed anyways. :P

 

[Lone_Puppy]

Shields wouldn't go down totally unless they got too low in the first place. XD At that point if someone beams over you're screwed anyways. :p

Internal turrets might help there. And lava pits or shark tanks. Oh wait, no sharks. Yet!

 

[PizzaPress]

Internal turrets might help there. And lava pits or shark tanks. Oh wait, no sharks. Yet!

We'll have things more dangerous than sharks to play with in the future.
:D

 

[Lone_Puppy]

We'll have things more dangerous than sharks to play with in the future.
:D

sharktopus's or whalewolf's maybe?

 

[Valiant70]

sharktopus's or whalewolf's maybe?

I find this trailer offensive not for its content, but for how FLIPPING CORNY it is. Can we not make any better movies?

I think the proper way to do transporters is just to follow Star Trek. You have to lower your shields manually (at least briefly) to transport, and there can't be an active shield on the other end. You have to shoot it out or fool someone in the other end into activating one to drop their shields long enough for you to trigger yours. It was balanced for the sake of story in Star Trek and it sounds game-balanced to me as well.

 

[Lone_Puppy]

I find this trailer offensive not for its content, but for how FLIPPING CORNY it is. Can we not make any better movies?

I think the proper way to do transporters is just to follow Star Trek. You have to lower your shields manually (at least briefly) to transport, and there can't be an active shield on the other end. You have to shoot it out or fool someone in the other end into activating one to drop their shields long enough for you to trigger yours. It was balanced for the sake of story in Star Trek and it sounds game-balanced to me as well.

I was hoping for this kind of game play with transporters too! Hopefully it can be implemented. I like the idea of having to lower shields either manually or forcibly, and also the idea that you can harmonize your transporters and shields to work together like they do in Star Trek. The harmony already exists in the form of Faction control, so this should be enough I would think.

 

[Trekkerjoe]

I did not quite see this coming. The transporters that it. Hopefully very soon, I will actually get to try them out. In the meantime, schema, I wonder what you guys are planning. The next update is only three days away...

 

[Ithirahad]

I did not quite see this coming. The transporters that it. Hopefully very soon, I will actually get to try them out. In the meantime, schema, I wonder what you guys are planning. The next update is only three days away...

Next update fixes things like that one bug where your beams go through entities to hit docked entities behind whatever you were targeting.

However, the update that is hitting later this month WILL have new content. Don't quote me on this, but... It's gonna be the cargo revamp, I'm willing to bet.

 

[linwe talion]

I am very glad to hear about the 2week dev cycle, I hope you will endure it, since it adds dynamics a lot. Glhf schine!

 

[Ithirahad]

I am very glad to hear about the 2week dev cycle, I hope you will endure it, since it adds dynamics a lot. Glhf schine!

Yeah, if that development cycle actually works out it'll be a lot better for near-term player retention... Personally, though, I was really loving the 1-month development cycle. I dunno.